Wednesday, July 31, 2013

This proposal was drafted by Hussein Askary, an
Iraqi who is now head of the LaRouche movement in Sweden. It is crucially
important not only for Egypt at a moment of life or death for that nation, but
for all nations being subjected to destabilization and destruction by the
British financial Empire. This article appears in the July 26, 2013 issue of
Executive Intelligence Review. Mike
Billington

Proposal for an
Egyptian Declarationof Economic Independence

Summary: The
interim Presidency of Egypt should make a public "Declaration of Economic
Independence," in which it should be announced:

That Egypt
is in a state of economic emergency.

That the
government will launch a national economic reconstruction program tantamount
to a postwar reconstruction plan, a program which will be binding on every
future government according to the new constitution.

The
government outlines specific medium- and long-term national infrastructure,
energy, water, agriculture, and industrial plans.

The
government declares all previous agreements with the International Monetary
Fund (IMF) to be null and void, and freezes all free-trade agreements with the
EU, and replaces them with bilateral economic cooperation and trade agreements
with European nations individually.

A sovereign
credit system to be established
domestically to support a "National Reconstruction and Development
Bank," to finance
the necessary development projects. Foreign nations are invited to subscribe
to the new national credit mechanism, either by direct deposits or by
extending guarantees, including export guarantees to corporations that will
provide technologies and know-how to the Egyptian reconstruction
program.

These points
have to be announced by the President, in a televised address to the nation, for
a "Declaration of Economic Independence," to seek the approval of the people of
Egypt. Following such approval, a national convention is to be held in which
these matters will be discussed in more detail by Egyptian scientists,
engineers, industrialists, and economists, in addition to public figures. The
convention will be held under the auspices of the different ministries of the
interim government.

Egypt's Dilemma, and
Its Future

Egypt has
been, since 1882, one of the main targets of the British Empire, first for
looting, and later, for control and destruction, when the Egyptian people's
character and patriotic nature rejected British imperialism. Since that time,
and throughout World War I, World War II, and the Cold War era, Egypt has been
the backbone of the Arab nations. If it goes, everyone else goes. If it
survives, a better future for the Arab nations and those in Southwest Asia and
North Africa is possible.

While
observers are puzzled by the recent events in Egypt, and whether there was a
military coup or not, or why Britain's ally, the Saudi Royal Family, suddenly
shifted their position to help overthrow the Muslim Brotherhood government of
Mohammed Morsi, the only significant issue to keep in mind is that the British
Empire's intention to destroy Egypt is still on the agenda. The British do not
care who is in power.

What is
important for the Empire is the policy of looting and destroying Egypt, which in
the past 40 years, has been characterized by economic destruction through the
IMF policies, which are backed by the recent U.S. administrations, and by
Europe. That Qatar and Saudi Arabia are suddenly on opposite front lines in
Egypt (while still united in the destruction of Syria through their support for
the British-deployed al-Qaeda jihadists) means nothing in the eyes of history,
since both the Saudis and Qataris are puppets of the same British
Empire.

Anti-Islamist
liberals of Egypt, who were mostly educated in British economic schools, are
equally as dangerous to Egypt as a nation, as are the jihadists and Salafists.
For the empire, it does not matter if the cat is black or white. What matters is
that it adds dead mice to its account.

That is why
the January 2011 "revolution" in Egypt never managed to bring about the changes
in the tragic social-economic conditions of the nation, which were wrought upon
the Egyptian people by the combination of the IMF, the European Union, and U.S.
policies imposed through the Hosni Mubarak regime.[1]

Then,
following the organization of new Presidential elections in June 2012, and when
then-President-elect Mohammed Morsi issued his Presidential declaration and his
"First 100-day program," it became clear that Egypt would not be relieved from
these terrible conditions, and would enter into a new maelstrom of economic,
social, and political crises leading to new upheavals and eventually to military
intervention! This was made as a forecast by this author in July 2012.[2]

To make the
point clear, here is the last paragraph of that article, which was published
exactly one year before Morsi's removal:

"Morsi's
First 100 Days program, which he announced after the elections, is nothing but
a low-calorie diet for the Egyptian people. He effectively proposes to
maintain the status quo of poverty, by focusing on keeping the bakeries open
with subsidies (a policy which adds nothing new, as it was even followed by
former President Mubarak) as the first point in the program, and keeping the
streets clean and traffic rolling as second, and making sure the old subway
system is running (and so forth). Such a program shows that this President is
not serious about alleviating the poverty and social injustice in the country.
If Morsi does not break with the IMF and World Bank policies, and immediately
call for an emergency mobilization to issue national credit to launch such
crucial projects as Africa Pass, this President will only prove the points
raised by this author about the origin and purpose of the Muslim
Brotherhood."

While
providing bread to the people is necessary, this is not the only purpose of
government. Instead of launching a massive reconstruction program, and breaking
all ties with the IMF and its policies, Morsi's government emphatically spent
the next six months begging ("negotiating with") the IMF to return to Egypt, and
to extend a humiliating $4 billion loan. Adding insult to injury, the IMF
refused. Not only did Mr. Morsi completely misread the internal situation in his
country, and in the U.S. Administration he was hoping would support him, but he
also failed to realize how bankrupt the IMF, and behind it the EU and the USA,
are, economically and financially.

The misguided
Morsi government and the economists who supported it tried to explain that the
sum of the IMF loan was not the issue, but that the IMF loan would have become a
"certificate" of good behavior for Egypt, allowing it to indulge in borrowing
money from international financial institutions. This would have further
enslaved Egypt with more debt.

The problem
of the Morsi government, in addition to its hunger for power, and as a political
pawn for Anglo-American geopolitics—in its role as part of the international
Muslim Brotherhood organization—was not lack of money but its lack of vision and
knowledge of true economics, physical economy.

Mistakes Could Be
Repeated

Now, what is
to be feared, is that the new interim government of Egypt, appointed by the
Supreme Council of the Armed Forces on July 4, will resort to the same temporary
measures and solutions to keep the status quo, leaving even greater burdens to
the coming government, which is supposed to be elected three to four months from
now, if political stability is preserved in the country!

The new
interim President, Adli Mansour, issued a new constitutional declaration on July
8, which said almost nothing about the state of the economy. He left it to
interim Prime Minister Hazem El-Beblawi to tackle this issue. Article 26 of the
constitutional declaration states that the prime minister "issues the necessary
regulation for the construction of public utilities and interests after the
approval of the ministerial cabinet, but if these imply adding more burden to
the government's general budget, they have to acquire the approval of the
President."

Now, for any
government, whether in Africa or even Europe, to stay within the limits of its
budget, leaves no space for any investments in public utilities, or any
meaningful large-scale projects to put the masses of unemployed people to
productive work and increase the productivity of the economy as a whole. This
becomes even impossible in light of the fact that the Egyptian government
deficit has been increasing at a rapid rate, especially since April 2011. The
Egyptian Finance Ministry announced in March this year that the total budget
deficit reached 10.6% of the country's gross domestic product (GDP) in the first
ten months of the 2012-13 fiscal year. The deficit reached US$26.5 billion,
compared with $16.8 billion in the period from July to April of the 2011-12
fiscal year. This deficit was expected to reach 11.5% of GDP by June. In 2012,
budget revenues were at US$50 billion, and expenditures were $77
billion.Egypt has
been borrowing in the international financial markets to finance its budget
deficit, and has been receiving preferential loans and aid from Qatar, the main
supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and the region. Qatar has extended
US$8 billion so far to the MB government. Following the overthrow of Morsi,
Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Kuwait pledged US$8 billion in loans
and grants to the new government. But everything has a price, and these generous
offers will tie Egypt to the process of forever chasing handouts to fill the
deficit.

Qatar, on the
other hand, was looking for booty in Egypt to loot in return for its loans, as
was the case with its attempt to lease the Suez Canal Corporation, an operation
which was stopped after massive popular protests. Another attempt by Qatar's
"sovereign wealth fund" QInvest was to take over a 60% stake (worth US$250
million) in the largest Egyptian investment bank, EFG Hermes. The deal, which
was rejected by Egyptian financial regulators in May 2013, was brokered by none
other than JPMorgan Chase, which advised EFG Hermes and Goldman Sachs, which
were advising Qinvest.

EFG Hermes is
typical of the corrupt financial institutions that are completely integrated
with the Anglo-American speculative financial empire, and which were
participating in the IMF-directed privatization of Egypt's state-owned
enterprises and assets in the era of President Mubarak. The deal was deemed by
Egyptians to be politically infected, as two of EFG's chief executives, Hassan
Heikal and Yasser El Mallawany, are on trial, along with the two sons of the
ousted Mubarak, upon charges of illegal share dealings in 2007
transactions.More than a
dozen domestic and international investment banks are active in Egypt, draining
a significant amount of Egypt's private capital into the global financial
bubble.

Consistent with her “salami-slicing” strategy, China published a new
“10-dash line” map, which is one dash longer than the “nine-dash line”
map published less than a year ago. That extra “dash” is placed near
Taiwan’s eastern shoreline.
With the tongue-shaped 10-dash line, all the countries surrounding
the South China Sea (SCS) would only extend 12 miles out to the
demarcation line of what China claims to be her “national boundary.”
China’s position is that these countries are not entitled to their
200-mile Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) as mandated by the United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) — to which China is a
signatory — because China claims “indisputable sovereignty” over the
entire area.
In a major move last week, China announced that she has unified her
coast guard into one organization that includes the maritime
surveillance fleet, maritime police, and fisheries law enforcement.
Prior to the unification, these vessels were not allowed to be equipped
with weapons. Now, they are.Code of Conduct

Joe Biden

The 10 ASEAN members, four of whom
have overlapping claims on the Spratly Islands, are trying to convince
China into agreeing to a Code of Conduct (COC) in the SCS. At the ASEAN
forum last month in Brunei, China agreed to meet with the ASEAN members
in September to develop rules to avoid conflict in the SCS.

Last week, U.S. Vice President Joseph Biden, who was visiting India
and Singapore, pushed China to negotiate a COC with ASEAN members. The
question is: How far would China go along in developing a COC without
giving up her sovereignty over the SCS? Which makes one wonder if China
would offer to agree to a COC in exchange for the other claimants to
waive their claims on all or part of the SCS.China Dream

Xi Jinping

Indeed, that’s what Chinese
President Xi Jinping’s “China Dream” is all about. It must be remembered
that Xi is first and foremost a pure Maoist. And he’d probably want to
realize the emergence of China as the world’s number one superpower.

During the summit meeting between Xi and President Barack Obama in
California last June, Xi told the media that he and Obama were meeting “to chart the future of China-US relations and draw a blueprint for this relationship.” Then he added: “The vast Pacific Ocean has enough space for two large countries like the United States and China.”Lake Beijing

First Island Chain and Second Island Chain

Last June 27, 2013, an intriguing article appeared in the Want China Times titled, “China to take Second Island Chain by 2020: analyst.”It says: “Within
seven years, China will be able to control the Second Island Chain — a
series of island groups that runs north to south from the Japanese
archipelago to the Bonin and Marshall islands — now that the PLA Navy
commands the nation’s first aircraft carrier, according to the
Hangzhou-based Qianjiang Evening News.”

The Second Island Chain runs through Guam, a U.S. territory. It
delineates what is referred to as the Western Pacific from the rest of
the Pacific. Simply put, if China succeeded in controlling the Second
Island Chain, she would be right at America’s doorsteps!

Admiral Liu Huaqing (Photo/CNS)

The article also said: “In 1982, Admiral Liu Huaqing, the former
commander of the PLA Navy and the mastermind of China’s modern naval
strategy, said that it would be necessary for China to control the First
and Second Island Chains by 2010 and 2020. The PLA Navy must be ready
to challenge US domination over the Western Pacific and the Indian Ocean
in 2040. If China is able to dominate the Second Island Chain seven
years from now, the East China Sea will become the backyard of the PLA
Navy.”
The First Island Chain runs from Japan’s southern tip through the
Ryukyu string of islands, through Taiwan, through the Philippines’
islands of Luzon and Palawan, and all along the western part of Borneo.
Interestingly, the First Island Chain runs parallel to the 10-dash
line’s demarcation.
If China succeeds in breaking through the First Island Chain and take
control of the Second Island Chain, the entire Western Pacific waters
would become “Lake Beijing.” And in the middle of Lake Beijing is the
Philippines, isolated from the rest of the world.
But for as long as the countries in the First Island Chain — mainly
Japan, Taiwan, and the Philippines – are allied with the U.S., China
would be blocked from gaining a foothold in the Pacific.Pivot to Asia

U.S. carrier strike group

It did not then come as a surprise that the Obama administration has
implemented the so-called “Pivot to Asia” that would shift 60% of the
U.S.’s naval and air forces to the Indo-Pacific Region (IPR) by 2020 to
counter a rising China. Indeed, the past two years saw the strengthening
of the U.S.’s strategic partnership with Japan, South Korea, Taiwan,
Philippines, Singapore, Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia, Australia,
Thailand, and India; thus, forming an arc that would effectively contain
China.

Subic Bay

With the deployment of the U.S.
Seventh Fleet to the Western Pacific waters and 150,000 military
personnel to Japan, South Korea, and Australia, China couldn’t break
through the First Island Chain. Recently, the Philippines announced to
relocate major air force and navy forces to the former U.S. naval base
at Subic Bay. The Philippines is also negotiating an “access agreement”
with the U.S. to allow the deployment of U.S. personnel, ships, and
aircraft on a “temporary” and rotational basis; thus, allowing
interoperability for joint operations of American and Philippine forces
when the need arises.

Meanwhile, the former U.S. Clark Air Base is hosting an undetermined
number of P3C Orion planes, the U.S.’s latest surveillance aircraft. The
Orions are conducting maritime patrol to monitor activities in the SCS.Game of WeiqiA
Chinese game called Weiqi (Go in Japanese), which means, “encircling
game,” is a board game that originated in China 2,500 years ago. There
are two players in the game. The rules are simple but rich in strategy.
Played with white and black pieces (“stones”), the object of the game is
to use one’s stones to surround a larger total area of the board. And
whoever ends up with a larger area, wins.
During a breakfast with reporters last July 29, Gen. Herbert “Hawk”
Carlisle, the U.S. Air Force chief of operations in the Pacific, said
that the U.S. Air Force will deploy “fighters, tankers, and at some
point in the future, maybe bombers on a rotational basis.” He also said
that the Air Force will “dramatically expand its military presence
across the Pacific this year, sending jets to Thailand, India,
Singapore, and Australia.” He also mentioned the possibility of using
the bases at Cubi Point and Puerto Princesa in the Philippines and
airfields in Indonesia and Malaysia. By the looks of it, the U.S. is
ahead in the Weiqi game.
But a series of bold moves by China is threatening the balance of
power in the Indo-Pacific region. With the new 10-dash line, China is
raising the ante. Is China’s hand strong or is she bluffing? The U.S. is
calling China’s bluff.
(PerryDiaz@gmail.com)

Tuesday, July 30, 2013

Blair’s affair with Murdoch wrecked my marriage, says Wendi Deng

Wendi Deng is reported to be devastated at the news of the torrid
affair carried on under her nose between her husband and the then Prime
Minister.
‘Of course, I was the last to know,’ she said. ‘The innuendo was
everywhere if I’d just opened my eyes. You only had to read two lines of
any article on Blair and my husband before the words ‘organ’ and
‘mouthpiece’ would appear.’
And it is only now that the full extent of her husband’s promiscuity
has become clear to her. He spent the Eighties in bed with Mrs Thatcher,
she has learned, and then followed a shorter, tempestuous
on-off-off-off affair with John Major. ‘The worst part of it was the way
he would brazenly flaunt it,’ says veteran Murdoch-watcher Bill Easton.
‘You only had to look at the latest Sun headline to see who he was in
bed with at any given time.’
Ms Deng is now resigned to the fact that he will never change his
philandering ways. ‘I remember the last election – as soon as Cameron
and Clegg got into power, he was Googling ‘threesomes’ on his laptop.’sydalg

The long-awaited criminal trial of former News of the World editors Rebekah Brooks and Andy Coulson, who face conspiracy charges
related to hacking the phones of murder victims and celebrities alike,
is slated for this September. According to a rumor spreading around News
Corp, things could get salacious.

ExaroNews
a British investigative web site, has just published the full
transcript of a secretly recorded meeting between media mogul Rupert
Murdoch… Read…

Sources
tell Gawker that during the discovery process, emails were unearthed
suggesting that Brooks had, at various times, had sex with Coulson, her
boss Rupert Murdoch, and Lachlan Murdoch, Rupert’s son and the likely successor to his empire. A new twist on honor thy father.

In one of
the emails, Brooks purportedly discussed the size of Coulson’s penis.
It’s not clear if her estimation of his member was favorable or not.

In response
to questions from Gawker, Steve Rubinstein, a spokesperson for the
Murdoch family, said unequivocally, "There is no truth to these rumors."
The lawyers representing Brooks and Coulson did not respond to requests for comment sent yesterday.

Whether the
rumor is true or not, it is definitely circulating widely at high
levels in the company. Three sources shared the claim of a sexual
relationship between Brooks and Rupert Murdoch with Gawker; all three
said they had learned the information through lawyers involved in the
case. Two of those three sources are high-ranking executives at News
Corp. The latter two sources had also both been told of a relationship
between Lachlan and Brooks.

According
to an intriguing but frustratingly vague report in the Daily Mail, UK
Prime Minister David Cameron and his office at No. 10 Downing Street… Read…

Rumors of the Coulson-Brooks affair have been floating around the Internet since last month when a vague report in The Daily Mail alluded to a “dynamite” sex scandal that prompted British Prime Minister David Cameron to hold crisis talks at Downing Street.

The prime minister's connection to the pair is two-fold. During the trial, Brooks will be represented by his brother Alexander Cameron. Meanwhile, Coulson's first job after after resigning as editor of News of the World was as director of communications for Cameron's Conservative Party. His next gig was as the top spokesman for Downing Street, before the scandal forced him to resign.

Poor
Rebekah Brooks! The disgraced former News of the World editor and News
International executive, who oversaw the paper and its parent company… Read…

Rupert Murdoch’s relationship with Brooks has been closely scrutinized over the years. In the midst of the escalating phone-hacking scandal in 2011, Murdoch told reporters Brooks was his first priority,
just before the smiling pair walked into the Stafford Hotel opposite
his London apartment. Wendi Deng, Murdoch’s soon-to-be-ex-wife, is
widely-known to despise Brooks, who was granted a $2.7 million payoff and chauffeured limousine as a reward for her loyalty.

In a Vanity Fair profile published last year, Murdoch insiders described Brooks as an “imposter daughter.”

“Although Murdoch has four daughters, two of them grown, over the
years he has seemed closer to Brooks than to any of them. She was,
people say, like the fantasy daughter, the daughter he always wished he
had—the one who never argued with him, who devoted her life to pleasing
him. They reportedly swim together in the mornings when he is in London.
She fusses over him at dinner parties—making sure he’s eating, that his
wineglass is full. “She’s very attentive,” says one News International
executive.”

According
to our sources, the damning emails are expected to come out as evidence
during the trial. Although the affairs are being gossiped about around
British newspaper circles, the country’s stringent legal culture when it
comes to reporting on criminal prosecutions and upcoming trials has,
thus far, kept it out of the press.

When the Daily Mail reported the mystery affair in June, the papers' refusal to name names was attributed to a “super injunction,” which both prevents newspaper from publishing information and from discussing the injunction.
Nonetheless, some natives persisted.
The British blogger Paul Staines, who writes under pseudonym "Guido Fawkes,” dropped a hint that the sex scandal concerned Brooks and Coulson. Another British blogger named Tom Winnifrith also pointed the finger at the Brooks and Coulson:

“The reason the Government and David Cameron personally is terrified
about this appearing is that he appointed Coulson as his spin doctor in
chief instead of a safer pair of hands from the BBC on the advice
of….the charming Rebekah. Rebekah was a good pal of his, lending him her horse to ride as they partied together in rural Oxfordshire. LOL.
And of course Rebekah’s lawyer is….David Cameron’s big brother Alex.

In
the wake of the news that Rupert Murdoch has filed for divorce against
Wendi Deng, people seem to be entering the above-referenced search
terms… Read…

Then there's the High Court of Stealth Online Stalking.
Google: “Rebekah Brooks sle—” and you’ll get a prompt for the phrase
“rebekah brooks sleeping with murdoch.” In a similar vein, the second
prompt for “Rebekah Brooks affair” is “Rebekah Brooks affair Andy
Coulson.” For our final search engine straw: “Rebekah Brooks ru—” will
make Google wonder if you were searching for: “Rebekah Brooks Rupert
Murdoch affair.”

Expand

Expand

Expand

We’ll have to wait until September for more substantial evidence.

Correction: Brooks has never been represented by Alexander Cameron, but she has been represented in the past by an attorney who is a member of Cameron's legal chambers. While we contacted that chambers, we did not contact Brooks' criminal attorney before publishing this story.

Update: We just recieved this email from Brooks' attorneys:

Dear Ms Tiku

I act for Mrs Rebekah Brooks in her forthcoming trial before the Central Criminal Court.

I have today had my attention drawn to a piece on your website which
is appearing now in the UK. The piece contains a number of false and
scurrilous accusations. No prior notice was provided to me by you of an
intention to publish this piece.

I have this evening referred the matter to the Attorney-General of
England and Wales as publication of the piece of this nature in the UK
before a trial constitutes the serious criminal offence of Contempt of
Court. The matter has also been referred to the Crown Prosecution
Service and the Trial Judge. No publication of any material that might
prejudice a trial is allowed in the UK and the offence is punishable
with a substantial sentence of imprisonment.
Please ensure and confirm that the piece is to removed immediately in order to mitigate any damage already done.
Yours sincerely,

Few Americans know what goes on at the Pentagon – the headquarters of
the United States military – and, most of the time, few care. Of
greater concern is the fact that few of America’s elected political
representatives know very much about what the Generals are doing,
either. Currently – and without much congressional oversight – the
Pentagon is preparing for war with China.
It is, of course, the job of the Defense Department to plan for
various contingencies, including strategies for dealing with emerging
threats. It was for this reason that, in late 2008, a strategy was born
that has since developed into a major Pentagon project aimed at
neutralizing the perceived threat of China, the world’s newest
superpower. This project is now known as AirSea Battle.
The AirSea Battle project is, in its most simplistic form, the plan
for pre-emptively attacking and neutralizing China. The project covers
the development of new weapons, technologies and military capabilities
that will be necessary for carrying out such an attack. Former Secretary
of Defense, Robert Gates, gave the project his official blessing in
2010. The Department of Defense Quadrennial Defense Review Report
directed the military to “develop a joint air-sea battle concept . . .
[to] address how air and naval forces will integrate capabilities across
all operational domains—air, sea, land, space, and cyberspace—to
counter growing challenges to U.S. freedom of action.” Leon Panetta, who
succeeded Gates as Defense Department chief, also endorsed the project
and established the Multi-Service Office to Advance AirSea Battle, as
described by Amitai Etzioni, Professor of International Affairs at The
George Washington University, in an article for Yale Journal of
International Affairs.
AirSea Battle requires “interoperable air and naval forces that can
execute networked, integrated attacks-in-depth to disrupt, destroy, and
defeat enemy anti-access area denial capabilities.” The project
acknowledges that “[t]he scope and intensity of U.S. stand-off and
penetrating strikes against tar­gets in mainland China clearly has
escalation implications.”
Does the development of the AirSea Battle project mean that President
Obama – or, indeed, the Pentagon – actually intends launching a
military strike against the Chinese? There is nothing to indicate such
an intention. In addition, China is not yet at the point where it could
seriously challenge the United States, militarily. As Etzioni infers,
however; the mere existence of AirSea Battle may prompt the Chinese to
escalate their own defense spending and planning for military
‘contingencies’.
It should be noted that Pentagon officials deny that the project is
aimed specifically at China. It appears to be widely accepted, however,
that the scope and nature of the AirSea Battle clearly indicate that it
is being developed with China in mind. As one senior naval officer put
it, “Air-Sea Battle is all about convincing the Chinese that we will win
this competition.”
The Chinese, of course, are aware of the project and are presumably
in little doubt that AirSea Battle was developed with them in mind.
The most unsettling aspect of this Pentagon project, however, is that
it has been neither reviewed, nor approved, by either the White House
or Congress; it was conceived by the military and approved by the
Defense Department, but appears to have moved forward with little
involvement or oversight by the civilian leadership of the United
States. In 2011, Admiral Robert F. Willard wrote to Defense Secretary
Panetta that “[d]espite reports throughout 2011 AirSea Battle had been
completed in an executive summary form, to my knowledge Members of
Congress have yet to be briefed on its conclusions or in any way made a
part of the process.”
The military, therefore is preparing for war with China without the
approval of elected representatives. The Pentagon, it seems, is quite
literally above the law.http://guardianlv.com/2013/07/pentagon-preparing-for-war-with-china/

Vice
President Joe Biden, speaks about the U.S. policy toward the
Asia-Pacific region at an event hosted by the Center for American
Progress, in Washington, Thursday, July 18, 2013. AP PHOTO/MANUEL BALCE
CENETA

American Vice President Joe Biden said in a speech that the alliance
with the Philippines is among the cornerstones of the United States’
defensive and economic strategies in the Asia Pacific region.
“The core of our strategy in the region are our alliances: Japan,
South Korea, Australia, the Philippines, Thailand,” Biden said, sharing
his take on the United States’ policy in the region at the Center for
American Progress on Thursday (Manila time).
Biden said the US’ strategic ties with these countries that have
transformed economically the past years are at the center of President
Barack Obama’s “re-balancing” policy, shifting its focus from Western
nations to Asia.
“Economically and strategically, it’s clear why the United States has
to re-balance, to direct our resources toward the Asia Pacific region,”
he said.
Biden also admitted that building alliances with the five countries
as well as India, Singapore and Indonesia have not been without risk, as
many of them suffer from disputes.
“In the Asia-Pacific, we saw a region of remarkable promise but also
genuine uncertainty and political risk. Many nations have experienced
rapid economic transformation that has fundamentally created a new
dynamic: rising ambitions and rising tensions,” Biden said.
To address the challenges, he said that the US’ “entire national
security and economic teams” are committed to solving concerns in the
Pacific region.
The strategy consists in “strengthening our alliances, deepening
partnerships and investing like never before in regional institutions to
help manage disputes peacefully,” Biden said.
Seeing the disputes over the South China Sea with China claiming
almost the entire territory, Biden urged China and the Association of
Southeast Asian Nations to draft a binding code of conduct over the sea
territory.
“That means no intimidation, no coercion, no aggression and a
commitment from all parties to reduce the risk of mistakes and
miscalculation,” he said.
“It is in everyone’s interest that there be freedom of navigation,
unimpended lawful commerce, respect for international laws and norms and
a peaceful resolution of territorial disputes,” Biden added.
Biden also said the US wants to help create 21st century “rules of
the road” to help Asian nations integrate and achieve security and
prosperity.
To spark growth, nations must raise their standards. He says there
must be fewer border barriers and better protections for intellectual
property, the US vice president said.
Another highlight of Biden’s address is about the US’ relationship
with a growing superpower in China–calling the ties both of “competition
and cooperation” and not of inevitable conflict.
He said Americans like to compete and that competition is good for
both countries. U.S.-China relations have been aggravated by economic
rivalry, accusations of cyber hacking and China’s inaction in
extraditing NSA leaker Edward Snowden. – With reports from APhttp://www.philstar.com/headlines/2013/07/19/988881/biden-alliance-phl-core-us-strategy

Monday, July 29, 2013

What the "War" on Whatever is Really About

7/29/2013 12:01:00 AM

Every time our culture passes gas sideways, liberals love
to trot out the theory of “income inequality” as the culprit behind it.
From the modern theory of “bullying,” to global warming, to breast cancer, to riots in Sweden, France, or the disappearance of the arctic ice shelf, income inequality looms large in liberal cosmology.
At a time when more people in the history of world have become
upwardly-mobile, solid members of the middle-class, liberals believe
that they must stop the natural process by which people are moved out of
poverty in favor of some sort of state-sponsored program that ensures
“fairness.”
From the Huffington Post:Participants in the annual World Economic Forum summit in Davos,
Switzerland are citing worldwide income inequality as a problem that
needs immediate attention, according to multiple reports. The political,
cultural and business leaders convening in Switzerland this week are
the latest group to express pointed concern over the growing gulf
between the planet's richest and poorest citizens. Several of the wealthiest Davos attendees have told the press that
they believe the current lopsided distribution of wealth is
unsustainable -- that the "global social-economic order will change, if
we want it or not," in the words of one industrialist quoted in
Bloomberg.It's not just them. The Forum's annual Global Risks report names
"severe income disparity" as the issue most likely to affect the world
over the next 10 years. And a poll of Davos participants conducted by
Bloomberg News found that more than half believe income inequality is
bad for economic growth -- a conclusion also reached by the
International Monetary Fund last year.About two-thirds believe governments should take active steps to address the issue, the survey also found.The Davos summit, taking place this week, comes after nearly a
year of international protests inspired by a lack of economic
opportunities, from Tahrir Square to Zuccotti Park, and on the heels of
numerous studies showing much of the world's population struggling with
deprivation.
So to sum: 1)Income Inequality is “settled” science.2)The world will end if we don’t address it.3)Rich people and government types- our betters- agree on this.4)We must do something about it immediately.
And whatever else they are saying, they mean for you to pay for it.

Obama even had the "audacity" to suggest to young Africans that they
can't aspire to have big homes, cars or even air conditioning.
"Ultimately you think you about all the youth that everybody’s
mentioned here in Africa," Obama wagged while in Africa, "if everybody’s
raising living standards to the point where everybody’s got a car, and
everybody’s got air conditioning, and everybody’s got a big house the
planet will boil over."

You see, “Income inequality” means something different in Egypt than it
does in Sweden or the U.S, even though liberals would have what
happened in Tahrir Square versus what happened in Zuccotti Park was part
of the same phenomenon.

Much of the hype about income inequality in the Western world is more about the changing dynamics of society and the make-up of households than it is about income.

The Pew Trust recently released a report that shows that one of the
prime movers behind income inequality, isn’t income at all, but the
growing number of single mother household, which have rocketed from 7.3
percent of all households to 25.3 percent of all households since 1960.

While noting that 40 percent of all households now have either a woman
earning more than a man or a woman as sole provider, the study also says
there is a huge difference between married households and single mother
households.

“The income gap between the two groups is quite large,” says Pew.
“The median total family income of married mothers who earn more than
their husbands was nearly $80,000 in 2011, well above the national
median of $57,100 for all families with children, and nearly four times
the $23,000 median for families led by a single mother.”
So, in other words, traditionally married couples, with moms as
breadwinners, enjoy a household income that is 40 percent higher than
the national average and nearly 400 percent higher than single moms.
The only people surprised by the finding are liberals.
As our contributor at Political Calculations wrote back in October of 2011:[I]f people with very high income earning potential join together
to form families and households, and increasingly do so over time,
perhaps because such people might have things in common that make
forming themselves into families and households an attractive
proposition, then income inequality among families and households will
increase.The same holds true for the opposite end of the income earning
spectrum. If people with really low income earning potential join
together to form families and households, or perhaps if they choose to
split apart, and increasingly do so over time, then the resulting low
income family and household will also make income inequality among
families and households rise, even though there has been no real change
in the amount of actual income inequality among individuals.
Liberals are getting wise to the argument that maybe people who get
married and stay married do better than ones who don’t. And it worries
them. This is just the type of argument that conservatives will use to
bolster the traditional family unit that has been around for 7,000 years
of recorded history.
So to combat this kind of nonsense progressives trot out their old
standby, a liberal academic expert in some new science, to lets us know
that all is not as it seems: “Stephanie Coontz, who teaches history and
family studies at The Evergreen State College,” reports NPR, “says women know they'll be better off if they marry a man who earns a good wage, but they may not have that option.”
NPR doesn’t even bother to cite any statistics beside professor
Coontz assertion that high school graduates make $4.00 per hour less in
constant dollars than they did in 1979- a statement for which I can find
no evidence.
"In many low-income communities, there are not many men like that
available," says Coontz of good wage-earning men. "Poverty is as often a
cause of unwed motherhood as it is a result."
So now it’s poverty that’s stopping people from being married, not a
liberal ideology that is hostile to marriage in general. What are you
gonna believe? 7,000 years of use and tradition, or Ms. Coontz and her
liberal betters who teach modified home economics on the side?
“Whenever someone expresses moral disapproval in a legal context,”
says U.S. Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan in regards to the only type
of marriage liberals approve of- that is gay marriage- “the red flag of
discrimination goes up for me.”
So as Father Robert Barron
observes, Kagan has an ethical objection to those of us who might have
an ethical objection to the state of marriage in the U.S. But somehow
Kagan’s ethical objection is morally superior to anyone else's. Ethical
objections put forward by liberals somehow defy the moral relativism
that supposed to apply to the rest of us knuckle-draggers who cling to
our guns and religion.
But here is the punchline that liberals are getting at: People who
stay married- presumably to spouses of the opposite gender- and reap the
benefits of their commitment need to pay for those who can’t or won’t.
“US children in single mother families have a poverty rate of 63 percent when only parental earnings are considered,” says the Nation,
“comparable to the 61 percent average for children in single mother
families in other high-income countries. But when transfer payments are
included—such as a government child allowance, unemployment insurance
and other assistance programs—the US rate only declines to 51 percent,
while the peer countries average poverty rate falls all the way down to
27 percent.”
See it’s your fault that single mothers are poor. And your fault that Africans can't have air conditioning.

We need, it seems, to follow the European model, because, yeah, that’s working out so well right now.
Just ask Ms. Coontz. She has a Masters in European History.
Her class American Families: Historical and Sociological Perspectives
studies “the gender and sexual norms of the 19th century, including
variation by race and class, then examine the changes pioneered in the
early 20th century. We discuss the rise of the 1950s male breadwinner
family and then follow its demise from the 1960s through the 1980s. We
end the quarter by discussing new patterns of partnering and parenting
in the past 30 years.”
The class runs from 9 AM to 5 PM on Saturdays. It is offered for
part-time credit only, because, yeah, it seems like it’s working out
real well right now.

First Thing We Do, Let's Kill All the Lawyers

Mike Adams

7/29/2013 12:01:00 AM - Mike Adams

The New York Times and the Huffington Post have been very
critical of recent legislation by the House and Senate of the State of
North Carolina. But neither of those liberal news outlets - and I use
the term "news outlets" loosely - have recognized their recent attempt
to restore due process in one of the most oppressive judicial systems in
the country. Indeed, the UNC system is among the greatest antagonists
of fairness and due process in the entire nation. Since this is a bold
assertion, it demands elaboration.

Students in the UNC system are routinely brought up on charges of
violating speech and conduct policies that are so vague that no one -
not even the people who write and enforce the policies - understands
exactly what kinds of speech and behavior they prohibit. When students
are brought up on these vague charges, they are denied lawyers. Crucial
evidence from investigations is often redacted prior to hearings.
Verdicts resulting in suspension and expulsion of students are often
decided and printed before the actual "hearings" begin. Often, after
students are deprived of due process and expelled, they are ineligible
for tuition refunds. It is the kind of "justice" one would expect in the
Middle East or in Latin America.

After liberals ignored these problems for years, conservatives got to
work last session sponsoring bills designed to address them. One of the
bills, passed by the Senate in late July, authorized a legislative study
of the issue, specifically to look at a student’s right to counsel in
the hearing process. The other, passed by the House in May, spells out
those rights. In the interests of full disclosure, I was involved in
drafting that legislation.

The bill we passed in the House would allow a student to be represented
during a hearing by a licensed attorney or “non-attorney advocate,”
except in a case involving academic dishonesty or in front of a student
honor court which is fully staffed by students. I am proud to say that
the bill was sponsored by Representative John Bell who was a student of
mine at UNC-Wilmington in the late 1990s.

Bell took particular interest in the issue as a result of a case
involving his old fraternity, Sigma Alpha Epsilon, at UNC Wilmington. In
that case, SAE officers were called into a hearing and questioned about
an alcohol-related incident. Because the conduct in question was
technically criminal, they asked for attorneys. UNCW officials refused
to allow them counsel. When the students asked a second time, those same
officials suggested that they might be violating the Seahawk Respect
Compact by taking a "disrespectful" tone with their interrogators.

When I heard a tape recording of the entire exchange, I was appalled and
decided to take action with the help of some attorney friends. For the
record, UNCW later threw the fraternity off campus for refusing to
cooperate with the investigation - in other words, for asserting their
rights to due process. At that point, we decided to take the issue to
the legislature.

The bill that was filed in April said a student could seek
representation from an attorney “during any formal stage of any
disciplinary procedure." The measure was later amended, at the UNC
system’s request, to include the exceptions for academic dishonesty
cases and any incident handled by a student-staffed honor court.
Predictably, The UNC system is still opposed to the measure.

But Bell’s bill passed the House on May 15 by a vote of 112-1, after
receiving just two minutes of floor debate. The vote was lopsided for a
simple reason: everyone but the UNC administration recognized that
Islamic terrorists in Gitmo have more rights to due process than college
students in North Carolina. (For the record, the one representative who
didn't support the measure left the session early. He didn't actually
vote against it).

Presently, legal representation or assistance of a student by a lawyer
in most instances “is neither required nor encouraged,” according to
written UNC system policies. The only exception is when a student who
faces a university administrative hearing simultaneously faces
off-campus criminal charges.

When a university hears of possible criminal conduct by a student, there
is an incentive to move forward without alerting the off campus
authorities. By taking the matter into their own hands, they may expel a
student at a hearing devoid of due process. Worse, the university may
decide to hold court over a matter that the police have already
investigated and decided to drop without so much as a single arrest. The
latter was the case with the incident involving SAE at UNCW.

But now, that is all about to change. Put simply, our little university
by the sea has ticked off the wrong legislature and the wrong
representative. And the good news is that the new right to counsel bill
isn't the only student rights bill to recently pass the house and head
toward the senate. There's another one coming down the pipe that will
not be well received by administrators with dictatorial tendencies.

That other bill will be the subject of a future column. In the meantime,
I hope that other conservatives will decide to join me in the battle
for campus due process. It sure is fun to be a community disorganizer
promoting hope and change from the inside of an ideological echo
chamber.Update: Since the writing of this column, the North Carolina
Student Administrative Equity Act has passed the Senate. It is on its
way to the desk of the state’s Republican governor. The author wishes to
thank all those who made this victory possible.

U.S. Link with China, Russia EIR Asia specialist Michael Billington gave this speech to the Schiller Institute conference in San Francisco on June 29, 2013.1

As has been discussed here, the Obama Administration and its British controllers are driving the world very rapidly toward war against Russia and China, over Syria, which Russia will not allow to be turned over to terrorist mobs as was done in Libya; meanwhile in Asia, Obama has adopted the Air-Sea Battle doctrine for a war with China.2

My intention here is to show you that the idea that Russia and China are natural adversaries of the United States is entirely a British concoction, despite the fact that many dumbed-down Americans have swallowed the British Kool-Aid. The fact is that the natural connection between the United States and Asia—both Russia and China—began long before the founding of the United States as a nation-state, and even before the “discovery” of America by Christopher Columbus. America began, in fact, as a

1. Previous coverage of the conference, including keynotes by Lyndon and Helga LaRouche can be found in EIR, July 12, and July 19, 2013. 2. See Michael Billington, “ ‘Air-Sea Battle’ Is a Plan for War on China,” EIR, June 28, 2013. Courtesy of Janus Kramer

thought-object in the mind of some of the greatest minds of Western civilization—in particular, Nicholas of Cusa and Gottfried Leibniz. It was as real then as it is today, for the nation is not just a physical location, or a government, recognized only by our senses, but it is a dynamic process, an idea, the City on the Hill, the New World.

Like Lyndon LaRouche today, Cusa and Leibniz not only dreamed about the future, they saw the future—both the horror of a future under imperial domination, and the great potential of the New World which they set about to create a republic free of the oligar

chical control of European monarchs and global Empire. As we will see, Gottfried Leibniz had already established the natural alliance between the future United States and both Russia and China, before the official founding of our nation.

That natural alliance was restored under Franklin Roosevelt, to defeat the British-created Nazi movement, and is finally coming back into being today under the inspiration of Lyndon and Helga LaRouche, based on the concept of a New Paradigm for the Survival of Civilization. Great projects, such as the Eurasian Land-

July 26, 2013 EIR Conference Report 39

Bridge, and the tunnel under the Bering Strait, uniting Russia, China, and the United States by rail, and bringing them together into a common mission for the future, can and must fulfill the creative discoveries of our forefathers, and end the power of Empire once and for all.

Bridge, and the tunnel under the Bering Strait, uniting Russia, China, and the United States by rail, and bringing them together into a common mission for the future, can and must fulfill the creative discoveries of our forefathers, and end the power of Empire once and for all.

The discovery of America by Columbus, as is now well known, can be attributed directly to Nicholas of Cusa, and to his close friend and colleague Paolo Toscanelli, who suggested to Columbus that the Far East could be reached by sailing west, including the belief that a New World lay in between Europe and Asia. Columbus carried with him on his voyage a map provided by Toscanelli.

As I reported last November in Frankfurt, at the first of these New Paradigm conferences, Leibniz was not only a follower of Cusa, and the seminal philosopher and scientist of his age, but also one of the great statesmen of history. He worked with Peter the Great in Russia to establish the Russian Academy of Sciences in 1724, worked closely with the Jesuit missionaries who had become the core of the scientific institutions in China, and even arranged a treaty between Russia and China over border issues and cooperation—the first East-West treaty in history. He published a journal, Novissima Sinica (News from China), in 1697, which analyzed the writings of Confucius, Mencius, and the greatest mind of the 12th-Century Song Dynasty Renaissance, Zhu Xi, which had been translated by the Jesuits, and made them known across Europe. A quote from that journal will be relevant to my report on the developments in the U.S.

I consider it a singular plan of the fates that human cultivation and refinement should today be concentrated, as it were, in the two extremes of our continent, in Europe and in China, which adorns the Orient as Europe does the opposite edge of the Earth. Perhaps Supreme Providence has ordained such an arrangement, so that, as the most cultivated and distant peoples stretch out their arms to each other, those in between may gradually be brought to a better way of life.

In his analysis of the Confucian philosophic outlook, Leibniz said: “It is pure Christianity, insofar as it renews the natural law inscribed in our hearts.”

Remember this concept for later.

Gottfried Leibniz collaborated with Peter the Great in Russia, to establish the Russian Academy of Sciences in 1724. His “Novissima Sinica” (1697) analyzed the writings of Confucius, Mencius, and Zhu Xi, and made them known across Europe.

Leibniz in America

The American Founding Fathers were profoundly affected by the works of Leibniz, and maintained contact with the Leibniz circles in Russia, especially in the Russian Academy of Sciences. During the American War of Independence, British warships were seizing Russian (and other) ships which were trading with the colonies, until Benjamin Franklin and other members of his American Philosophic Society made direct appeals to their associates in the Academy of Sciences in St. Petersburg and certain Russian diplomatic contacts, leading to the creation of the League of Armed Neutrality. The League of Armed Neutrality declared that Russia (and other officially neutral nations) had the right to trade with the colonies, and would consider any British attack on neutral merchant vessels as an act of war.

After the war, American naval hero John Paul Jones went to Russia, and helped build the Russian Navy, and, of course, America’s greatest statesman John Quincy Adams became the first Minister to Russia in 1809. Leading Russian circles translated and published Alexander Hamilton’s “Report on Manufactures” in 1807, telling the

40 Conference Report EIR July 26, 2013

Tsar that its principles were fully applicable for developing Russia as a continental country. And the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers worked directly on Russia’s first railroad, from St. Petersburg to Moscow, in the 1840s.

The British spent much of the 19th Century trying to break up the United States and Russia (and China), through warfare and economic sabotage. The Crimean War against Russia in the 1850s was aimed at splitting up Russia; it was soon followed by the British-instigated Civil War in the United States, intended to split this nation, and to maintain free trade in slaves, and in cheap cotton from the slave plantations. To some extent, the Civil War was also an extension of the two British Opium Wars against China in the 1840s and 1850s—again, waging war to defend the free trade in slaves, and also opium.

Again, the U.S. ties with Russia were crucial in the victory over the British Confederacy. How many people today know that the entire Russian fleet was deployed into New York Harbor, and also, right here, near San Francisco, in 1863, at the crucial point in the Civil War? The Russians had informed the British and their French allies that, were they to proceed with their plan to intervene on behalf of the Confederacy (a peace mission, you understand, a humanitarian intervention to protect civilians, due to the Brits’ moral concern and the responsibility to protect civilians in the Confederacy from the marauding Northern armies), then the Russians would intervene to defend the legitimate government of the United States.

If this sounds familiar to what is going on in Syria today, that is no coincidence.

Lincoln and Russia

President Abraham Lincoln also understood, even as war was breaking out, that the United States was extremely vulnerable, as long as the continent remained divided. California had become a state in 1850, after the 1848 Gold Rush brought tens of thousands of Americans—and thousands of Chinese—to California, but transport to the West Coast took several months, and was treacherous. This was one reason that part of the Russian fleet came to San Francisco—to prevent any British incursions in the unprotected region on the Pacific.

So Lincoln and the Congress launched the Transcontinental Railroad project in 1862, even as war was raging, to connect the nation from east to west by rail. The result, of course was the development of cities and farms across the continent, and eventual statehood for all the area in-between.

Another purpose was the outreach to Asia. The U.S. had been largely excluded from Asia—in fact, our major commerce in Asia before the Civil War had been carried out by Boston merchants, outright British agents, who were openly part of the British opium trade—including the family of William Weld, the Massachusetts U.S. Attorney who prosecuted LaRouche in the 1980s.

Efforts by courageous missionaries and others to counter the British in China and Asia generally were easily crushed by the overwhelming British power. But the Transcontinental Railroad was an arrow through the continent pointing directly at China; it opened up the growing industrial might of the Union to trade and investment in Asia (Figure 1). It is well known that 80% of the workforce on the Railroad was Chinese, and that the Chinese workers were greatly respected for the quality of their work.

Less well known, is that Russian engineers were in San Francisco at that time, and, as the telegraph wires spanned the North American continent along with the railroad, so also, Russia and the U.S. began building telegraph wires up the northern coast of the Pacific, through Russian America (now Alaska), with the intention of crossing the Bering Strait and crossing Russia all the way to St. Petersburg. The Bering Strait project was only de

42 Conference Report EIR July 26, 2013 serted in 1867, when the Trans-Atlantic cable was successfully laid, but it had opened up the region, and contributed to the U.S. purchase of Alaska from the Russians at that time. And of course, the project is now being revived by the LaRouche movement, and the Russians, in the form of the rail connection over the Bering Strait, connected to the NAWAPA project and related great projects internationally—the International Land-Bridge. Following the Civil War, Lincoln’s economist Henry Carey carried the American System and the idea of transcontinental nation building to Europe—to Germany, where Bismarck created the German nation based on American System principles; and to Russia, where Count Witte led the effort to create the Trans-Siberian Railroad, once again connecting the Atlantic to the Pacific, this time across the Eurasian continent (Figure 2). The Oldest and Newest ‘Empires’ On the U.S.-China connection, I want to talk about a single individual whom you have almost certainly never heard of. But that very fact speaks volumes about what has happened to this nation. Rev. William Speer was a dentist and a Presbyterian missionary who went to Canton (Guangzhou) in 1846 to open the first Presbyterian mission there. He became fluent in Cantonese, but was forced to leave for health reasons after five years. He then spent most of the rest of his life working with Chinese immigrants in San Francisco, opening the first Asian Christian Church in the U.S. (now called the Presbyterian Church in Chinatown), as well as a school and a dispensary (now called the Chinese Hospital). He spoke widely, published many pamphlets in both English and Chinese, and authored a book in 1870 titled: The Oldest and the Newest Empires, China and the United States. (Don’t be distracted by the term “empire”—he used the term benignly to mean a nation with a universal mission.) I want to read to you several passages from his book, which you will immediately recognize as coming from the Leibnizian tradition. On Speer’s view of China in America: “It is hard to account for the common estimate of China and its people in Great Britain and America other-Central Pacific Union Pacific Completed later FIGURE 1 The Trans-Continental Railroad FIGURE 5 U.S. Passport Service

wise than by attributing it to the influence of the bad East India Company and the diabolical opium trade.”

wise than by attributing it to the influence of the bad East India Company and the diabolical opium trade.”

Reflecting his debt to Leibniz and Leibniz’s global vision, consider these passages. On the nature of the Chinese people:

“Both Confucius and Mencius saw with bitterness the utter inefficiency of truth which looks no higher than earth to reform society or to stay the power of human passions.” Speer believed that there

were “few nations of the world among whom the freedom of the people is more large, more squarely founded upon their intelligence, or more carefully guarded against despotism, than in China.” He notes that in the Middle Ages, China was the greatest and most civilized kingdom on Earth, but China had remained stationary while the West moved forward with the coming of the Renaissance.

In a quotation from Leibniz in all but name—and recall the quote I read from Leibniz at the beginning—Speer wrote: “For centuries past the most philosophic minds have predicted the vast consequences which should ensue when the two opposite currents of empire—one eastward, one westward, since the beginning of time—should at last meet and flow together. Upon our Pacific Coast, this consummat-

Sun Yat-sen was trained by American missionaries who were steeped in the tradition of Alexander Hamilton and Abraham Lincoln. Sun went on to build a republic in China based on those American System principles. This statue, modelled on the one in the Lincoln Memorial, is located in the Sun Yat-sen Memorial in Taipei, Taiwan.

Rev. William Speer (shown here with his wife), a Presbyterian missionary, went to Canton (Guangzhou) in 1846 to open the first Presbyterian mission there. He later worked with Chinese immigrants in San Francisco, opening the first Asian Christian Church in the U.S.

ing event of the history of the world has now commenced.”

And on the nature of the human being, he again reflects Leibniz’s insistence that the truth is written in our hearts, referring to “the eternal principles of right which the Governor of the world has written in the chambers of the human heart and made deeper and more authoritative than any statutes of human appointment.” Alexander Hamilton, he writes, “presents their nature with the clearness of the light of the Sun”:

“The Deity has constituted an eternal and immutable law, which is obligatory upon all mankind, prior to any human institution whatever. He endowed man with rational facilities by the help of which to discern and pursue such things as were consistent with his duty and inter

est, and invested him with the inviolable right to personal liberty and personal safety. The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for among old parchments or musty records. They are written as with sunbeams, in the whole volume of human nature, by the hand of Divinity itself, and can never be erased or obscured by mortal power.”

Elsewhere, he quotes, essentially, again without naming him, from Abraham Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Address. Remember this is published in 1870 (just five years after the end of the Civil War): “The Ruler [referring here to God], in due time, asserts and displays divine justice and power by the terrible punishment of oppressors and wrong-doers, and compensation of those who have suffered. The history of African slavery and the

July 26, 2013 EIR Conference Report 43

judgments it brought upon us is surely the lesson which this nation should never forget.”

judgments it brought upon us is surely the lesson which this nation should never forget.”

Conclusion

This vision was snuffed out, as the British, as they have done repeatedly in our nation’s history, succeeded in using ignorance and corruption to unleash in the United States an era of racist exclusion laws and similar

policies to undermine the assimilation of the Chinese into the U.S. melting pot. Reverend Speer fought this insanity, and also spent some time in Hawaii, where later, the great Chinese revolutionary Sun Yat-sen was trained by American missionaries steeped in the tradition of Alexander Hamilton and Abraham Lincoln, and went on to build a Republic in China based on those American System principles.

The mission today is the same, but the consequences of failure far greater. Transforming the U.S., and reestablishing the historic alliances with Russia and China, are necessary if civilization is to survive. LaRouche has emphasized repeatedly that we must restore not only the vision, but the way of thinking itself, of the great minds who have shaped this nation, such as Cusa and Leibniz, and LaRouche, who saw the future, acted to destroy Empire, and created the City upon the Hill. It is ours to lose, or to create anew.

and a new era for the Philippines started. President

Franklin Delano Roosevelt gave us new hope in im-Butch Valdes: The Special plementing many of the things that he had done for

the United States. He paid particular attention to theRole of the Philippines Philippines, because we were, at that time, the only

colony that needed to be given independence by the Butch Valdes, leader of the Philippine LaRouche So-U.S., through the promise that he had made to the rest ciety, sent this greeting to the San Francisco Schiller of the world. Institute conference. After granting us independence, the sorry thing

that had happened was, Roosevelt died. But not with-We here in the Philippines take inspiration from the out starting certain infrastructural development pro-words of Mr. Lyndon LaRouche, as he has on several grams, initiated by the very same people who may occasions told us, via our radio program, that our have started the Tennessee Valley Authority, putting country, the Philippines, has a very special role, in the Philippines on a foundation which would allow trying to save civilization. Just as we have been, over us the opportunity to develop as well. the past so many centuries, the gateway of Western The role of the United States, as a leader nation, thought moving towards the Eastern part of the world, since 300 years ago, has not stopped. It has become we, today, have that special role: to share with the rest even more significant and necessary at the present of the world’s population from this part of the world, time. We call on the members of the international Lathe ideas which are needed to be assimilated, the ideas Rouche movement; we call on the citizens of the that are needed to be implemented, in order for us to United States of America; and we call on the leaders save civilization from this present, ongoing collapse of of the United States of America, to do everything that the financial system, and threatening a situation that it takes to implement, to reinstitute the Glass-Steawe all are very scared of, that is, World War III. gall law, as a primary and necessary step towards

Our history with the United States goes back all saving not just America, not just the Philippines, but the way to the 1900s, or even before—but specifi-the rest of the world. cally the 1900s, when the U.S. had bought us from This has been your legacy since 1776, and this Spain, after Spain colonized us for close to 400 years, should be your legacy from this time on.

Sunday, July 28, 2013

Intellectual Revolution: The Necessity of the Thinkers and the Revolutionary Minds

July 25, 2013by Jose Mario de Vega

This humble paper is an affirmative response to the lucid and scholarly essay of Ms. Natalie Shobana Ambrose’s “Empowering our thinkers”, The Sun Daily, July 12th.

illustradoThough I overwhelmingly concur to her general proposition, I beg the indulgence of the reader that I may be allowed to adumbrate and elaborate on the various theses that she laid down.

Indeed, “throughout history, the most dangerous people to any regime have not been the thugs, thieves or murderers but rather the thinkers and the intellectuals. For centuries governments have crafted laws limiting the opinions and vetoing findings of studies from being publicised or rubbishing theories that do not fit with their agenda. So much so modern academics find that they constantly self-censor or thread far away from what is deemed sensitive or controversial subjects as a form of self-preservation and survival.”

Said dangerous people, namely the thinkers, the intellectuals, the iconoclasts, the mavericks and independent observer has always been the irritating thorn to any regime, especially a state that is perceived to be unjust, unfair and perverted.

More often than not, said regime’s program to neutralize these individuals is to either eliminate them or silence them by sending them to the dungeon or by banishing them altogether from the territory of the said country.

Another vicious method being resorted into by these kinds of regimes is to enact laws that stifle, delimit, impede and denounce the unorthodox opinions of the said intellectuals.

Added to this is the Macheviallian act of the said regimes of harassing, questioning and denying the very position of these intellectuals whose radical views do not subscribe or follows the “official” program of the state.

These evil regimes also forced the thinkers and the independent observers to conform to the state-sanctioned policy.

Some, gave in due to pressure, hence instead of pursuing their research and project up to its conclusion; they engage in an internal conflicting act of censoring themselves, editing their work, doctoring their data, altering their findings and worst, some even decides not to proceed with their endeavor at all.

The reason is plain and simple: they have to engage in all these preposterous and ridiculous means for purposes of self-preservation and survival.

This is a shame!

As the writer contended:

“This missing voice is a great tell-tale of how authoritarian a government is and how much or little such talent is valued in the society. We see this throughout the world – talented academics who would rather bypass the red tape of taking on local issues as study topics instead embark on ground-breaking research in other lands so as to not rock the boat back home.

“Malaysia has not been spared in this respect. Not only have we lost bright stars to other lands by limiting the very essence of their work, we have also inevitably dumbed down our thinkers through fear, bureaucracy and threatening their livelihoods.

“Malaysia is going through fascinating transformation both socially and politically. In the last 10 years, the change has been profound. Yet so little study has been done amid all the political cacophony, and the Malaysian academic voice has been rather quiet. We have to ask the question why.”

Comment:

By reason of fear and reprisal, persecution and state violence, some scholars, instead of embarking on ground-breaking enterprise and earth-shaking endeavor would rather avoid the great possibility of offending the powers that be and instead leave their country of origin and hesitantly exile themselves to other lands that is more tolerant and appreciative of their talents, potentialities and bright ideas.

This is a tremendous lose to the native land of the said researcher and a big goldmine to the adopted country.

Why?

This is a clear case of brain drain to the country of origin and as already noted; a gold mine to the new country or sanctuary.

The one that will benefit from the product of the intellectual labor and academic insights of the said scholar will not be his/her own native country but the nation that is presently adopting the said researcher.

This is not a new phenomenon, when Socrates was condemned to death unjustly by the stupid mob, his student Plato cannot bear the thought to stay in the city that killed his teacher so he decided to leave Greece for a while.

The same is true of Aristotle, when his student Alexander the Great dies, he also decided to leave Athens, saying thus that his act of leaving is his way of “saving the Athenians from sinning twice against Philosophy.”

The writer’s question is totally in point: why is it that despite the fact that Malaysia is going through a fascinating transformation both socially and politically in the last 10 years wherein the changes has been so rapid and utterly profound; ironically so little study has been done amid all the political cacophony and why the Malaysian academic voice has been rather quiet?

This is irony of all ironies, indeed!

It is beyond dispute that it is the author herself that squarely answered her own query.

Undeniably, the local bright stars are leaving the country due to the lack of equal opportunity, unfair policy, unjust government selection program, social injustice and the stupid conception of the state of affirmative action.

Added to these list of grievances and complaints is the irrefutable fact that “we have also inevitably dumbed down our thinkers through fear, bureaucracy and threatening their livelihoods.”

This is a shame!

Again, we return to the perennial social evils of the problem, namely: the act of the state in belittling, mocking, irritating, questioning, and harassing the thinkers through fear, bureaucratic brouhaha and economic blackmail.

Not added to this is the state’s act of political persecution such as dismissing the academic from the university or college, suing the said lecturer, teachers or professor and engaging in a character assassination of the said intellectual by using the vast powers of the government to disrepute the integrity of the thinker and put into doubt the product of his/her labor and scholarly work, when the only fault of the said academic is that his or her work is critical of the government or run counter to “the official line” being promoted by the state.

For those who decided to stay and confront bravely the perverted system of corruption, they must also face the full wrath of whole state machinery.

This is precisely the reasons why the thinkers and intellectuals had not taken advantage of this hotbed of potential study topics and areas of possible research.

Imagine an academic that will write a thesis which title is: How could the BN form the government when they are only voted 49% of the population?

Will the government accept that kind of research?

And what do you think will happen to those intellectuals who had undertaken the said studies? How are they going to be treated?

The answer is: either they are dismissed from their posts, or their contract will not be renewed or perhaps they will see themselves at the dock appearing before a court answering some silly and flimsy charges or their books will be ordered to be banned or they may die accidentally or they may disappear mysteriously or they may struggle economically to find some sponsor or funding that will going to support their work.

I concur with the writer that the problem I feel lies in space. The exact term being use in political science is the so-called “democratic space”.

Again, the bold questions posited by the writer are highly in point:

Is there a space where people are empowered to provide evidence-based critique?

Comment:

Yes, there is a certain degree of “space”, but here’s the caveat: be ready and be willing to face the repercussions and consequences of your intellectual actions.

A true thinker and a genuine intellectual that proceeded to present an unorthodox work to the public must be ready and utterly prepare to hear the following idiotic and preposterous charges:

“if you don’t like it here, leave!” “go back to where you came from” “what more do you want, ingrate?”

All of these are the price that an intellectual and a scholar have to pay and confront bravely in order to his or her quest of pursuing the truth and consequently spreading his or her ideas and thoughts to the public and the world!

“It seems far easier for a foreigner to write a book, article, thesis on Malaysian issues than it would be for a local. If we don’t agree with their findings – we can rubbish it as not correctly understanding Malaysia since they are an outsider. Of course the other argument is that Malaysians are too emotionally embroiled to carry out such studies. Perhaps there is some truth to it but that is not a good enough reason to leave a gaping hole in research work by local thinkers.”

Comment:

On the Question of Empowering the Intelligentsia?

The great Russian novelist, Maxim Gorky said that the existence of the intellectuals is necessary in any form of society.

In my view, an intellectual has no nationality, because genius is universal. Nonetheless, I concur with the author that a community must produce its own thinkers and intellectuals before the world claim him or her.

Therefore, the Malaysian academic must rise above their “emotional embroidery” and carry out their studies — against all odds and regardless of the adverse consequences — whatever they may be.

To quote the words of Ralph Waldo Emerson:

“I am ashamed to think how easily we capitulate to badges and names, to large societies and dead institutions.”

The Role of the Intellectuals

Professor Noam Chomsky said that “it is the responsibility of intellectuals to speak the truth and to expose lies.”

To quote from my article:

What is an intellectual?

According to Wikipedia, an intellectual is: a person who uses thought and reason, intelligence and critical or analytical reasoning, in either a professional or a personal capacity and is:

3. a person of notable cultural and artistic expertise whose knowledge grants him or her intellectual authority in public discourse.

Based these definition, an intellectual is a person or an individual who is involved or is engaged in creating erudite ideas (whether abstract or not) and making some theories.

The primordial duty of the intellectual is to disseminate ideas. He or she is of notable culture and held some artistic expertise which standing gives him/her a sense of intellectual authority in public discourse.

Who are the intellectuals?

There is no iota of doubt that the intellectuals are the philosophers, the teachers, the writers, the poets, the artists and the like!

The French existentialist philosopher and Marxist revolutionary, Jean Paul Sartre pronounced that the intellectuals are the moral conscience of their age. He passionately believed as he himself lived his life the way he wrote and taught that: the task of the intellectuals is not limited by merely observing the political and social situation of the moment, but undeniably to be involved and engaged actively in all of society’s issues and concerns. Finally, he also maintained that part and parcel of the duty of an intellectual is to serve as a voice of the marginalized, the oppressed, the idiots, the exploited, the lowest members of the society and indeed to speak out—

About Me

ROLAND SAN JUAN was a researcher, management consultant, inventor, a part time radio broadcaster and a publishing director. He died last November 25, 2008 after suffering a stroke. His staff will continue his unfinished work to inform the world of the untold truths. Please read Erick San Juan's articles at: ericksanjuan.blogspot.com This blog is dedicated to the late Max Soliven, a FILIPINO PATRIOT.
DISCLAIMER - We do not own or claim any rights to the articles presented in this blog. They are for information and reference only for whatever it's worth. They are copyrighted to their rightful owners.
************************************
Please listen in to Erick San Juan's daily radio program which is aired through DWSS 1494khz AM @ 5:30pm, Mondays through Fridays, R.P. time, with broadcast title, “WHISTLEBLOWER” the broadcast tackle current issues, breaking news, commentaries and analyses of various events of political and social significance.
***************************************
LIVE STREAMING
http://www.dwss-am1494khz.blogspot.com